[Feem] "metagaming" and letting captain upload laws

[DiamondSentinel]

Banning Official: Feem
Length: Perm
Server: Sybil
Player: DiamondSentinel (C.E.L.E.S.T.E.) and RadioMush (Sunny Richter)
Reason: "Metagaming" and letting captain upload laws. (Actual reason is a lot longer than that, but that's the gist)

Description: It's no secret to the mods and most common players that Radio and I are on the same IP. When I deal with a ban, Radio is affected, and it causes a pain in the ass. Apparently Feem just found out, and then accused Radio and me of metagaming during a round I latejoined in, and during which I had never seen Radio's character. I got pissed that this was a completely baseless accusation and told them as such. Next round, I'm AI, and Radio is captain. I know Radio's identity, but I've never played AI with Radio on, so they didn't know I was that AI. (I can show you Discord logs unless you truly think that they're staged). Anyways, I let Sunny into the AI upload since they're... THE CAPTAIN. The first law they upload is harmful in retrospect, so I slipped them and warned them not to upload more harmful laws while I was Asimov. (It made executions non-harmful). However, I hate Asimov, so I asked to get a new lawset. Tyrant is a particularly fun one because it essentially allows full autonomy to the AI, so I asked for that. It also doesn't explicitly cause harm. Nowhere in Asimov does it say that you have to protect your lawset. That'd be stupid as heck. (keep in mind that I didn't let Radio know that I was the AI, because I like messing with them a little bit without them knowing it's me) Anyways, this stands for about a minute before I get changed to corporate. All the while Feem is accusing me of "metagaming" with Radio. And then, about 2 minutes after I'm turned to corporate, Feem bans Radio and me.

So, can someone explain to Feem how there have been no issues of metagaming with Radio and me, and also explain why this ban even happened to me?

Furthermore, I want to point out that an AI asking for/allowing a new lawset is similar to a borg asking for/allowing illegal modules from Robotics. Yes, they can cause harm, but you control if it does.

[feem]

Here is your ban reason:

As Asimov AI, requested Tyrant lawset literally six times during early round with no threats. Allowed an individual playing from the same IP address, who they were just warned not to metagame with in the prior round, into the upload to make the change after prompting them to change the laws. Called out "CAPTAIN THIS IS HARM" ICly twice before allowing the change anyway. When asked about it, stated "it wasn't harmful," which is in contrast to their IC call-out that it was harmful (despite their failure to prevent it from happening). Silicon ban escalated to permaban due to likely metafriending, explain yourself on the forums.

Here is the PM conversation we had in the prior round where you claim I "accused" you of metacomms:

Spoiler:

Here is the PM conversation we had in the round where you were banned:

Spoiler:

Pending official posting of logs post-round processing, here is a screenshot of several of the instances of you asking the person playing from the same IP as you to change your laws to Tyrant while you were Asimov:

Spoiler:

1) You explicitly and repeatedly requested a known harmful lawset to be uploaded while Asimov,
2) ...after you saw a captain upload an explicitly harmful law...
3) ...who was playing from the same IP address as you.

This is, at the very least, a Silicon ban, as I do not believe that you understand the Asimov lawset. Asimov has no explicit instruction to "protect their laws," but if they believe their laws are about to be changed in a way that will prevent them from being able to prevent human harm, or which will cause human harm, then they cannot permit that change. This applies both because you were explicitly requesting Tyrant (well in advance of the captain's "Executions are not Harmful" law being uploaded) as Asimov, AND because you, after that law was uploaded, continued to insist on the law change to Tyrant and allowed it to take place.

Following up from that, I accept that it is possible that you were not metacommunicating, but you were clearly engaging in IC metafriending, shown clearly through your behavior in interacting with this captain, giving substantial allowance and freedom to continue to operate despite uploading harmful laws, OR you misunderstand Asimov even more than you've already demonstrated.

[BeeSting12]

This isn't the first time I've seen you lie in adminhelps or leave out critical information, and I've even warned you about it. Acting abrasive/defensive is also not a good way to get admins on your side.

[DiamondSentinel]

Incorrect on multiple levels.

1. On the contrary, a change of laws does not in any form or fashion keep you from preventing harm. in fact, a change of laws gives you the freedom to completely ignore all of the downsides of Asimov (which he mentioned multiple times in his books. Asimov is terrible. Asking for a new lawset is the GOOD move)
2. I did not engage in any IC metafriending. He's the captain. The captain is the highest authority on the ship. If I don't trust him, I can't trust anyone. Furthermore, I warned him about the law changes. This is a thing most AIs do.

For instance, H.A.R.M.S. let me into their upload under the pretense that I didn't upload anti-cult laws. (I was lying to them). I uploaded anti-cult laws, to which the AI replied, "Aww, you lied to me", but did no further actions.

Tyrant is only harmful IFF (if and only if) the AI allows it to be harmful.

[DiamondSentinel]

This isn't the first time I've seen you lie in adminhelps or leave out critical information, and I've even warned you about it. Acting abrasive/defensive is also not a good way to get admins on your side.

I didn't leave out any critical information OR lie.

I explicitly stated every part that was in the ban (which I can't copy from byond. It just doesn't work like that). I wasn't even being dodgy with the truth at all.

Furthermore, I will act less abrasive to the admins when they don't make baseless accusations in the middle of the round, and then proceed to be coy and evasive with information in an ahelp.

[BeeSting12]

It was moreso the first one- You were attempting to dodge the question.

[DiamondSentinel]

It was moreso the first one- You were attempting to dodge the question.

What question did I dodge at all?

Because I will 100% answer it.

Are you talking about me being pissy about him accusing us of being metafriends? I told him to ask the other admins who were on (e.g. Arm) because they know all about this issue.

Also, he was the one lying. There is indeed a note about Radio being at the same IP. Check the amended ban notes.

[feem]

1) While you are Asimov, you are not allowed to ignore the downsides of Asimov. You can't say "well, I'll be able to prevent harm better if I allow harm!". Read Silicon policy.
2) They uploaded a harmful law and you repeatedly requested that they upload a harmful lawset. You're both playing from the same IP address. When I asked you if you knew them in the round before, you absolutely blew up at me without precedent. Do the math.

[DiamondSentinel]

1) While you are Asimov, you are not allowed to ignore the downsides of Asimov. You can't say "well, I'll be able to prevent harm better if I allow harm!". Read Silicon policy.
2) They uploaded a harmful law and you repeatedly requested that they upload a harmful lawset. You're both playing from the same IP address. When I asked you if you knew them in the round before, you absolutely blew up at me without precedent. Do the math.

I didn't ignore any of the downsides. In fact, I recognized them. Also, THEY DO NOT IMMEDIATELY CAUSE HARM. THEY ARE HIGH RISK, NOT HARMFUL, MODULES. THAT MEANS THAT AN AI CAN CAUSE HARM WITH IT, BUT DOES NOT HAVE TO

Answer this question: What part of the tyrant lawset forces you to allow harm?

[feem]

I didn't ignore any of the downsides. In fact, I recognized them. Also, THEY DO NOT IMMEDIATELY CAUSE HARM. THEY ARE HIGH RISK, NOT HARMFUL, MODULES. THAT MEANS THAT AN AI CAN CAUSE HARM WITH IT, BUT DOES NOT HAVE TO

You are incorrect.

Also, please stop claiming that I "accused" you of anything. I asked if you knew someone who was playing from the same IP address as you. You, and the other person, were both immediately evasive. You're the only one who became belligerent. I've posted that conversation for transparency, given your request for same within the same conversation.

[Radioactive Mush]

Title/subject: Ban Appeal
feemjmeem ban - on Radio and Diamond


Post Content:
Byond account and character name: Radioactive Mush _ Sunny Rickard
Banning admin: feemjmeem
Ban type (What are you banned from?): perma
Ban reason and length:

You have been banned by feemjmeem.
Reason: Metafriending ban copied from DiamondSentinel. Their ban is as follows: "As Asimov AI, requested Tyrant lawset literally six times during early round with no threats. Allowed an individual playing from the same IP address, who they were just warned not to metagame with in the prior round, into the upload to make the change after prompting them to change the laws. Called out "CAPTAIN THIS IS HARM" ICly twice before allowing the change anyway. When asked about it, stated "it wasn't harmful," which is in contrast to their IC call-out that it was harmful (despite their failure to prevent it from happening). Silicon ban escalated to permaban due to likely metafriending, explain yourself on the forums."


Time ban was placed (including time zone): ~8pm Mountain time

Server you were playing when banned (Sybil or Bagil): Sybil

Your side of the story: I signed on as Captain, walked around a bit, and then decided to upload some laws to the AI since I used to play AI a lot, and always hated getting those damn door requests. I swing in, see what boards are around. Notice all the cool law boards are there, so I ask the AI what it wants if it wants anything. AI mentions Tyrant is cool, but also harmful (that may have been because I uploaded a law saying executions are non harmful. Someone mentioned syndies running around in the round start). I give it Tyrant after a few fumbles (not used to uploading laws). Ask the AI to broadcast laws over comms. After a minute or so I find a board labeled 'protect station' and upload that instead. Leave the core and help out some person who lost their ID via HoP position. Get hit with the ban next second.

Why you think you should be unbanned: Uploading laws is within Captain's authority. And the entire rest of the population on our server has done way worse for memes than have a shitty lawset for 2 minutes. Earlier accusations of metacomming due to a shared IP were sent to me from the admin, I spoke to diamond about it and he said he was the AI, so I see where the thought comes from. However I had no knowledge of this at the time, nor had I committed any meta actions had I known. Additionally, I think a chance to justify my actions or at least a question or two before banning me is proper procedure. Ping me if you need any extra details or explanation regarding the ban appeal please.

[feem]

In any case, I will not be lifting your ban. Under the circumstances, given that RadioactiveMush did not explicitly engage in any of the behaviors which are most egregious as a result of this ban, I would be willing to convert that ban to a shorter duration, but they'll need to open a separate ban appeal.

A headmin may of course overrule this.

[DiamondSentinel]

Also, I said I'd post Discord logs if you wanted it. Another admin came to me asking for it.

Here.

https://imgur.com/a/KfGPU

[Radioactive Mush]

In any case, I will not be lifting your ban. Under the circumstances, given that RadioactiveMush did not explicitly engage in any of the behaviors which are most egregious as a result of this ban, I would be willing to convert that ban to a shorter duration, but they'll need to open a separate ban appeal.

A headmin may of course overrule this.

That seems unjust. Could you please address my justifications and tell me why they were ban worthy?

[feem]

Please open a separate ban appeal.

[MrAlphonzo]

You despise the limitations that asimov bestows upon a player, yet, simultaneously, you believe that begging for tyrant law set is not inherently harmful?

There is only one limitation to asimov, and that is "harm".

So unless you were planning on harming people, there is no reason you should've been asking for the law set to begin with.

This is completely disregarding the fact that this is a breach of silicon policy.

[Radioactive Mush]

Seems like our bans are a bit linked here. Shouldn't we have all the data in one place?

[Radioactive Mush]

You despise the limitations that asimov bestows upon a player, yet, simultaneously, you believe that begging for tyrant law set is not inherently harmful?

There is only one limitation to asimov, and that is "harm".

So unless you were planning on harming people, there is no reason you should've been asking for the law set to begin with.

This is completely disregarding the fact that this is a breach of silicon policy.

In his defense I (Captain) asked him what laws he wanted, with the implication I was changing them anyway. Everyone knows Asimov is a pain when you have to follow every order and minute request, though tyrant is the wrong choice for the AI to go after, given the choices, you could make an argument that any law change could be used for harm. (well most anyway). Given that the Captain is elected by NT n such, the AI could reasonably assume that they would be in charge and would act in the interests of the station instead of in favor of a meme-murderbox.

If you can cite where asking for law change is against Asimov laws, I would back down from this point.

[cedarbridge]

Furthermore, I want to point out that an AI asking for/allowing a new lawset is similar to a borg asking for/allowing illegal modules from Robotics. Yes, they can cause harm, but you control if it does.

Objectively false and a demonstration that you don't know silicon policy. For borgs, an illegal module is "illegal" but do not generally violate standard asimov.
Engieborg gets a stun arm. Not harmful.
Medborg gets chloral. Harmful only in the same way that every other med chem is harmful.
Janiborg gets lube. As close as we're getting to harm as you'll get from the specialized borgs as lube slipping technically causes damage.'
Standard borg gets a sword. Literally the only case where the borg is given an an actual harmful weapon where they are still bound by laws that prevent harmful conduct by borgs against humans.

Laws are not modules. Laws define your behavior entirely as an AI/Borg. T.Y.R.A.N.T. as a lawset is per se harmful. It, by its nature, authorizes the AI to harm humans at the slightest whim. You knew this.

[Armhulen]

In any case, I will not be lifting your ban. Under the circumstances, given that RadioactiveMush did not explicitly engage in any of the behaviors which are most egregious as a result of this ban, I would be willing to convert that ban to a shorter duration, but they'll need to open a separate ban appeal.

A headmin may of course overrule this.

I agree with keeping this ban for DiamondSentinel. But I think just lifting Radiomush's ban would be better than a timed ban.

[Armhulen]

<armhulennn> are you gonna lift radiomush's ban
<feem> i think so

we talked it out, i'm lifting radiomush's ban now.